Sub menu

If Guns Are “Bad”….

All high politicians – including Dear Leader and Gauleiter Bloomberg – are surrounded by heavily armed guards?

There is never a mass shooting at a police station?

There is virtually no “gun crime” in Switzerland, even though the Swiss are armed to the teeth, with full-auto military combat rifles in the hands of nearly every adult male between the ages of 18 and 45?

Guns save so many lives each year – including most recently the lives of numerous potential victims of a mass shooting in Oregon at the Clackamas Town Center Mall, where concealed carry permit holder Nick Meli confronted armed killer Jacob Tyler Roberts – who had already shot two people dead … and prevented him from shooting more people dead?

Rural areas tend to have high concentrations of guns relative to urban areas – yet “gun crime” is inexorably higher in urban areas while it is almost nonexistent in the rural areas?

Concealed carry permit holders are less likely to be involved in an unjustified (non-defensive) shooting than a cop?

Some advocates of “sensible” gun control argue that no one needs – take your pick – a semi-automatic pistol or rifle (which means virtually all pistols and rifles that aren’t single-shot Derringers and bolt-action rifles) or a “high capacity” magazine or a weapon over a certain caliber or which has a certain “threatening” (to some) appearance – even if its function is identical to a rifle with a “less menacing” appearance.

Well, who really needs more than $50,000 a year to live on? Or more than an 800 sq. foot dwelling? Does anyone need more car than is sufficient to get from A to B at the posted speed limit? Who really needs anything beyond the bare minimum necessary to maintain one’s physical existence?

Who needs to live to be older than 80? Who needs to have more than one kid?

Do you really need a 40 ounce drink? Or more than one drink of soda per day?

How many calories per day does a person need?

Oh, but guns are different!

Not really. And the principle behind the argument is identical.

If need is to become the justification for allowing us to do (or posses) things, then we are already enslaved in our minds – and soon will be enslaved physically and utterly.

From each according to his abilities… to each according to his needs.

This famous statement is left hanging. The need is never qualified.

Need – according to whom?

Inevitably, need will be defined by those who wield power. And if it is accepted that firearms ownership should be restricted based on need – as opposed to something someone has actually done – the restrictions will not end with guns.

That is the principle at stake here:

Needs – vs. rights.

In a free society, the individual’s natural right to decide for himself what his needs are is respected – and codified into law. You may think the guy next door is an idiot for living in a 4,000 sq. foot home when it’s just him and his wife. What does he need that for, you may say to yourself. Just as he may say to himself: What does that guy need all those rifles for? Just as the guy down the road wonders why the guy across the street needs all those old motorcycles. After all, he can only ride one at a time… .

But each to his own.

It’s just a more everyday way of stating what Jefferson stated with greater eloquence: The pursuit of happiness. To be free to choose. To not have others choose for you. To live as you – not your neighbor, not some politician – see fit. So long as what you do isn’t causing someone else harm. And it causes no harm – as such – for a man to own a powerful gun, or a powerful car. Or to live in a large house. Or to enjoy working on old motorcycles. To pursue his happiness.

In an unfree society – a society such as the one America is rapidly becoming – the individual’s needs are defined by others.By those who have power.

By those who possess guns – but deny others their right to own a gun.

Because they have decided they need guns.

But others – the others being whomever they so classify – do not.

Just as they will – if this business goes the wrong way – shortly begin to decide that no one needs to have more than a certain amount of money. Or a certain kind of car. Or so much house. Or more than “x” number of children.

And so on – without end, without limit. Because need is ultimately undefinable. It can mean anything anyone wants it to mean. And if those with guns decide you don’t need a gun – they will feel free to decide you don’t need other things as well. Depend upon it.

Need is the intellectual-moral cup of hemlock being offered to the American people.

Colorado senate president John Morse (D-Colorado Springs) remarking on the NRA suggestion about installing armed guards in schools.

“Morse said such a bill wouldn’t solve the problem of gun violence in schools.

‘I think the average police shooting is at 11 feet…and they only hit their target around 20 percent of the time,’ said Morse, a former Fountain police chief. ‘And these idiots are saying, if we just had somebody in the school armed we could take care of this. That’s stupid, it’s just stupid.'”

Stop and think about that. This is a qualified “only one” remarking on the marksmanship capabilities of other “only ones” on a MAN-SIZED target at a distance equal to or less than the length of most modern cars. He’s actually saying that the average LEO can only hit their target with one round in five. So wouldn’t that mean only three probable hits out of a magazine capable of holding fifteen rounds?

And the powers-that-be want to ban these magazines for the rest of us?

And even if he didn’t connect with the Connecticut shooting, one would think the Aurora theater shooting MIGHT have crossed his mind? Especially when multiple assailants were mentioned in early reports of both events and the Aurora shooting happened in what is essentially a suburb of Denver?

I can’t imagine shooting that bad. I shot better than that cop number at a greater range after a short safety prep and being handed a 9mm handgun at a range many years ago. It’s not difficult in the least to get say 5 out 6 on the paper.

The only explanation for missing that badly I can come up with that’s not embarrassing is… the gun. Some handguns are designed almost exclusively for self-defense at very close quarters. Short barrels, fixed sights. They’re not made to shoot tight groups at 20 yards – just to hit what’s two or three feet in front of you – and closing. I’ve got a snubbie .38 that’s like that. For close-quarters self-defense, such a gun does what it was designed to do.

And sometimes, carrying a small gun of that type CC is less cumbersome than carrying something that is made to be accurate at 20 yards!

But, from what I have been able to determine, cops carry full-sized Glocks and Sigs. So there’s no excuse for such shitty shooting!

“It may be because civilian gun enthusiasts spend less time at Dunkin Donuts and more time at the range.”

Undoubtedly true, but I don’t think that’s the root cause.
Don’t the departments pay for ammo for shooting on the range? IE, not coming out of Porky’s pocket?
But probably also capped. The first three mags are covered by expenses, after that…

So, we put together a lack of NEED to shoot accurately (few people shoot back), plus a cap at how much shooting is free per year (or inversely when it starts to COST you) + low standards of hitting the broad side of a barn from inside …

So, the cop doesn’t care as long as he makes qualification. collaterol damage, who cares? Missed shots? Not comin’ out of HIS paycheck..
The civilian OTOH needs to shoot reliably ALL THE TIME, as “collaterol damage” will mean jail time. Also, time spent at the range equals real dollars spent – so make sure you hit the F*cking target. At ranges greater than “so close a bum rush will put you out of the fight, gun or no gun.” (IE, greater than about 20 feet.)

Ever notice these events don’t happen in the ghettos of this country? The schools that have armed guards and make no pretense of not being like a prison? The schools where students could very well be armed?

Yet we are supposed to believed armed people in the schools won’t deter such things?

Then again, children in the ghetto probably don’t get drugged because there isn’t any money to make from kids who’s parents don’t have insurance that will pay for it.

What Jones did was priceless. He was everywhere I’d want to be. The UVC- Ultimate Verbal Champion in mixed mental arts in the On-Air Octagon.

Alex took long pauses and gave Piers Stefan Pughe-Morgan plenty of fair chances to sputter his effete drivel in limp attempts to rechain a rogue slave back into harness, but Alex could not be submitted by the fish and chips fembot.

Alexander “The Great” Emerick Jones instead just kept concept hammering and principle whipping away with a barrage of verbal kidney and body blows that left Piers Morgan Stanley Fairchild speechless; even made him tap out before the scheduled third round of the interview.

It’s absolutely time to get angry, but composer and intellect will win the argument. There’s nothing more satisfying than an intellectual smack-down and the deafening silence of your opponent. At that point he has one of two options: see the light, or make a conscience decision to live in denial, which is by definition delusion and once they’ve gone there, there’s really no reaching them.

Jones beat Morgan on by Morgan’s own game. It’s nice but I really would like to see the collective punishment argument be made in the mainstream. Force people to see the prison-camp nature of it. Ask them what else they want everyone restricted because of the few that can’t handle something. Arguing stats and such IMO is meaningless because ultimately this has nothing to do with stats and everything to deal with our natural rights. Are we all prisoners? Are we all to be restricted by abilities and morality of the least capable and worst of the human population?

I also want to see more pro-gun guys turn the argument around and stress the KEY point–that the gun-grabbers created the problem with their victim disarmament zones.

At every turn, by making it more difficult for good people to get and especially carry guns, they’ve murdered people who otherwise could have defended themselves.

Of course these points aren’t for the Elite, or their hatchet-men like Piers Morgan…they’re in on the game and know it has nothing to do with logic.

The best technique to spreading gun love, though, is still the Guns Are Cool shows. Look at FPS Russia on YouTube–half a billion views, hot girls shooting cool guns.

Weapon porn. Sex sells.

Or if you don’t have the budget, take a libtard to the range. I’ll never forget converting a friend’s wife; she got squirrely after a hurricane that knocked out power in Houston for a week or two in most places. Next thing you know, she’s got a Glock and she’s gung-ho!

When Someone with a Gun takes Someone Hostage and they have Not
A Firearm they are at the Mercy of the Hostage Taker with a
Gun

Equally in the Cases of Armed Robbery

Firearms may Kill but so do Large Kitchen Knifes and Chainsaws
but One does Not Hear Calls to Control Them

Americans must Sad and Tragic as what Happened Stand by the
2nd Amendment as a Disarmed Population is at the Mercy of Thugs
Muggers Murderers Hostage Takers and Rapists with Weapons wherever
Guns or Not

The Main-stream-to-serfdom press wants us to mistake a mouse for an elephant, and an elephant for a mouse. Today, in the U.S., many more people are dying from overfeeding than from underfeeding. Many more people are killed by excessive comfort than from discomfort.

Firearms harm less than 1/25th the number of people than do the corn syprup, cereal, wheat, and orange juice industries, a tragedy which the Statists & Clovers seem to have no problems with.

Its mind boggling, that, in the 21st century, “literate” & “intelligent” people would prefer the emotionally lurid to the unassailably statistical facts of the matter.

So the moral of the story is this, registration is far more dangerous than just allowing “law enforcement” to know who is armed and where they live. Now every burglar, violent predator and rapist along with the state sanctioned thugs, can pick and choose their targets far more effectively. Now we already know how accurate gun-vernment information is. That’s why innocent people have their doors kicked in, their dogs and even they themselves are shot by those sworn to “protect and serve” on an all too frequent basis because the thug-scrum gets the address wrong.

So how many of these permit holders have passed away, moved, sold their guns or have inaccurate information filed with the county clerk? How many now will end up having their homes burglarized for their guns? If a CCW permit is on your “to do” list you may want to reconsider. Most likely if you need to carry a concealed gun, you are responsible and don’t go robbing liquor stores or waving it around in a crowded mall, no one will be any the wiser. Sure, you may have to be more careful, even with your driving. If you do get stopped you may have to be more courteous to the uniformed thug. As much as it might chap your hide to do so, joining your state’s sheriff’s association and having their stickers on your vehicles’ back bumpers isn’t a bad idea either. As we well know, NRA, GOA, Gadsen flags and Ron Paul bumper stickers are bad Joo-joo to many l.e.o.s these days. Being a successful freedom outlaw involves being as wise as the serpent and as gentle as a dove.

If you have a CCW in many states it’s on your driver’s license, so the cop will know it as soon as runs your plate. And if he has a partner, you may have a cocked and loaded 12 ga. shotgun pointed at the back of your head over a burnt out tail light. It’s time to stop complying with the empire’s edicts, asking for their permission and supplying them with information. Nothing good can possibly come from it. Now it looks like a lot of bad will undoubtedly follow it. The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance; so like riding a motorcycle, it is essential that we be very careful, keep our heads on a swivel, constantly look in all directions and especially over our shoulders; never let your guard down. It’s time to take our country back from the Clovers. We can do that by outsmarting them, which isn’t be too difficult at all. Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah or have a Wonderful Winter Solistice all. Here’s to more Liberty in the coming new year.

Mind: These people are not “public figures.” They have a right to not have their personal lives invaded by a newspaper. Especially when the obvious purpose is malicious – and the consequences could be serious.

What goes by the sobriquet, “liberalism” has become stridently authoritarian over the past 40 years. But in a mewly, harpy sort of way. The typical liberal is a physical coward who would never attempt to impose his ideology on anyone himself. He prefers instead to insist on a new law – and have that law enforced by professional bullies. Of course, many “conservatives” are exactly of the same type. And they share the same pettifogging moral busybodyism – just directed at other objects (e.g., “drugs,” homosexuals and so on).

It ought to tell these people (“liberals” – and “conservatives,” too) that if what they advocate entails coercion, including potentially lethal violence – and they are uncomfortable about administering the coercion themselves – or even admitting to themselves the coercion that is necessarily entailed – then perhaps there is something wrong with what they advocate….

What goes by the sobriquet, “liberalism” has become stridently authoritarian over the past 40 years.

Definitely. I stumbled across the following as I was looking for gun rights related quotes.

“Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. This is not to say that firearms should not be very carefully used and that definite safety rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced. But the right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible.”
— Hubert Humphrey, quote in Guns Magazine February 1960

“… that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion.”

It’s pretty clear that they are engaging in “mental reservation or purpose of evasion.”

I’ve tested this out during online discussions with some academics of my acquaintance. These guys are your standard issue Demopublicans and Republicrats.

I do my “The emperor has no clothes” schtick with them, and they don’t know how to respond. They know I’ve got them dead to rights. They know I’ve caught them compelling others to obey their dictates and to hand over their wallets.

I do that every time they gush over another coercive redistributionist law passed by Congress.

How do they respond?

They don’t! They pretend not to hear me.

As long as I talk about other, non-controversial topics, they respond to me in a timely manner.

But every time I point out how they are pointing guns at other peoples’ heads and extorting obedience and wealth from them, my comments go unanswered.

Bevin, that wikipedia entry is wrong. It makes it look as though Australia is the outlier and that the U.K. and other English speaking countries use “liberal” to mean what the U.S.A. does. They don’t. Even though the capital “L” Liberal Party in Britain got very left wing and eventually merged with the Democrats to form the Liberal Democrats, a social democrat party, they weren’t doing that with a change of meaning of “liberal” but as wolves in sheep’s clothing under the fair name of liberal.

Guns don’t watch TV shows, or buy products. People do. You want me to stand up and Demand A Plan? How’s this for a plan? You won’t get one thin Polio-Legged Roosevelt Dime out of me, you Carrie A. Nations ain’t even worth a bucket of Stephen King’s Blood. Goes for many others, I’d bet. A lot of others, like me, who’re willing to wager real money.

Only I can’t wager $10,000 of money near where my mouth is any longer on Intrade about when you Fame Floozies will back down, because some Clover already screwed and neutered that pooch for you. But I would if I could, you extra Vegan California Clover Vegemite Sandwiches.

Don’t think we’re above a modern Tarring & Feathering of Bloomberg either. We’ll use modern humane methods of course during the live worldwide broadcast of his impeachment and lifetime deportation.

Demand A Plan and the matrix of Gaultierian Mayors Against Guns will someday soon enjoy a concilatory kissing of our Townspeople Against Tyrants asses,

Mayor Michael Rubens Bloomberg’s Sandy Storm Sandy School Kristallnacht. Soon to be the cause of his overthrow.

The only show I watch with these SheepleKommandos is New Girl. It’s already been blocked and password protected within the Cox Cable viewer software. Anyone in my household will have to watch something else, or learn to crypto-hack.

Yeah, the celebs recently coming out for victim disarmament is surprising. Almost the entire cast of Parks and Recreation was especially upsetting, as was Steve Carrel, Conan – hell most of them!

What I was really surprised to learn was that Bradjolina are pro gun. I always sensed that Brad was a fairly solid guy (Fight Club and Snatch are two great movies).

But Angelina Jolie?! I thought she was a first rate flake but if it is true that she is pro gun then I will have to reaccess her even though she is still a shill for the UN. Gun rights is a litmus test for me; I will judge you on that one issue alone.

Angelina Jolie
Jolie, an avid shooter (she has to be to be getting her own $400k shooting range), Jolie has several times expressed her support of the Second Amendment.

In 2008, Jolie told the U.K.’s Daily Mail, “I bought original, real guns of the type we used in ‘Tomb Raider’ for security. Brad and I are not against having a gun in the house, and we do have one. And yes, I’d be able to use it if I had to … If anybody comes into my home and tries to hurt my kids, I’ve no problem shooting them.”

Surprisingly badass!

She’s a bleeding heart liberal in other areas, but this redeems her somewhat.

Nice. She’s from a Pre-Code cinema family. As are Barrymores, Ralph Bellamy (Randolph Duke of Trading Places.) Movies before 1935 and from 1965-1973(Screw u Jack Valenti) were not forced to shill for Old Biddy/Holy Roller Mafia Overlords.

You know, there was a time in this country when smart people were considered cool, well maybe not cool, but they did things like build ships and pyramids and they even went to the moon, there was a time in this country, a long time ago, when reading wasn’t just for fags and neither was writing…

If guns are bad, why were there lines out the door two hours after opening, in 32 degree blustery weather today, as THOUSANDS lined up for a (last) chance at an “ugly black rifle” before they’re all gone? Why were the lines 5-10 deep at the ammo vendors as HUNDREDS lined up to purchase CASES of modern center fire ammunition, while it is STILL AVAILABLE?

The clovers say they believe in “democracy,” in “the will of the people,” and in “free elections.”

Do they?

Ludwig von Mises described free markets as a democracy in which every penny gives a right to cast a ballot.

It seems to me the good citizens of America have made the will of the people abundantly clear by lining up in the freezing cold to buy guns.

So now the question is, will Obama, Bloomberg, and their ilk, who purport to be “champions of democracy,” respect “the will of the people?,” Will they acknowledge that gun sales are defacto plebiscites and referenda on gun ownership?

The great and undistinguished masses of Americans form a society, the mass society. I do not mean this in a pejorative sense. Apart from the mass society is another society. This is the Leadership. It’s also been called the Establishment or the Elite. The Leadership is a society open to whoever enters it by dint of desire, fame, power, money, influence, election, or a leadership position over large numbers of people in the mass society. People in the Leadership are either in the government, supporting the government, or controlling the government. Government and Leadership are fused. They permeate one another. Mass society is there for their control and management.

Democracy is all about pulling the wool over the eyes of the sheeple, and making them think that “We the Sheeple” rule themselves merely because they participated in the empty charade known as “voting.”

Bevin, Rozeff’s observation is as interesting as it is true. When I was still living in Virginia, my wife and I started a petition drive that ended up with several thousand signatures going to the governor. According to our contact at the Home School Legal Defense Assoc., the governor’s office wanted “to know who you are.” At the time I took that in its most ominous sense and (combined with other reasons) we moved far away. Although, in retrospect I’m inclined to believe that the “elite” just wanted to harness our energy for their own aims. I strongly suspect if I had been willing to sell out it would have resulted in an invitation to join “The Leadership.” I think the correct term for that is “influence peddling.” We wouldn’t have been interested because we are not for sale. I doubt most insiders with “the party” can understand that concept. Hence the lack of principled leadership we see in gun-vernment from the courthouse to the Whitehouse.

Sad isn’t it? The Leadership coopts any force that attempts to overthrow them.

Unless and until people have the smarts to realize that nobody benefits from such a system in the long run, it will persist.

The Leadership benefits in the short run by ripping off mass society. But even they don’t benefit as much as they would have had they acted with integrity. .

The destructive effect on economic prosperity undermines even their own long term well being and quality of life.

But they are either too blind to see it, or too myopic to care, and are content with short term gains extracted by force out of our hides.

This is why I laugh bitterly when Western “champions of democracy” harp on “human rights violations in China.”

Of course the government on mainland China violates human rights. Do we libertarians know of any government that doesn’t?

The only difference is that the leadership of the “advanced democracies” are more sophisticated. They are more adept at camouflaging their equally egregious human rights violations beneath a veneer of pro forma ritual, such as voting.

A (perhaps not so) rare moment of candor from one on the inside of the machine. OTOH, it’s hard to imagine that anyone with eyes, ears, and a functioning cerebrum needed Cohen’s admission to realize the truth. More discouraging still is knowing that it won’t make any difference to the deluded masses who are so used to imbibing the Koolaid that they can’t live without it.

The MSM don’t even need to hide it. The sheeple are so well conditioned it doesn’t matter.

For proof, just visit any 9/11 Truth Movement YouTube channel.

The Amerikanischen Schafenmenschen will be out in force. lambasting us truthers for pointing out the obvious — that high rise buildings cannot collapse into their own footprints at free fall speed — unless the structural supports below have been moved out of the way by explosives.

Bevin as I was preparing to go to the joint for awhile(having a little idea about the nature of things-I questioned why these 3 buildings in the world of architecture were unique) My good friend advised me to stay out of dark places for awhile,anybody could see that that there were covenants in place that John Q didnt need to know about-Kevin

What a lot of people fail to realize this is all part of the globalization scheme to implement Agenda 21 and the new UN small arms control treaty.

Does anyone think that the psychopaths that run D.C. have any qualms about shooting 20 school kids in CT any more than they have any qualms about dropping smart bombs from drones on children in countries such as Afghanistan and Pakistan?

Or the 31 poisoned during Prohibition… Or however many were killed in the Whiskey Rebellion…
Or however many eggs they need to break to make this Utopian Omelette.

But people look at me funny for suggesting we use the same tactics?
SERIOUSLY?
Do you REALLY want to argue over the tactics used by the Black Plague? (Masque of the Red Death)

Shall we dispute the methods used to kill cancer cells IN DETAIL, or will we get to the point of killing the cancer cells and GET THE JOB DONE?

>>>THAT<<< is our problem. There IS no "moral high ground." We're in a slow, cold-ish war. We either deal with the enemy, or we succumb to the enemy. 40 years has shown me Enough. And people have been through far worse, btu they still bend over and spread 'em… W.T.F.?

This is the same government – and many of the same people – that without batting an eye “decided” to invade Iraq and as a result caused the deaths of (according to the most conservative estimates) 100,000 people, of whom thousands were old people, women and young children.

Or, if you prefer your slaughtered closer to home, there’s the immolation of all those kids at Waco, Texas. Janet Reno – Jurgen Stroop… what’s the difference, please?

The history of the government is chock full of such examples, unfortunately.

For the victims of the surge. The troop surge that came ashore in Tripoli Libya on the Sandy Shores of the Tailhook Scandle Sandyhook. Sandy Bush-Clinton a Libyan Marine was hung today. He was earlier named in the Tailhook Scandle. Secretary Clinton was unable to attend execution to file protest due to prior Sandy Hook Fund Raising Host Commitment.

Morpheus: The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you’re inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save.

Ladies Conclusion-
Even if the film series does not ultimately establish a complete rejection of the material realm, The Matrix as it stands still asserts the superiority of the human capacity for imagination and realization over the limited “intelligence” of technology. Whether stated in terms of matter/ spirit, body/ mind, hardware/ software or illusion/ truth, the ultimate message of The Matrix seems to be that there may be levels of metaphysical reality beyond what we can ordinarily perceive, and the film urges us to open ourselves to the possibility of awakening to them.

My Conclusion. I take what I like and leave the rest of the zionist, primordial gnostic, and papist religions of my earlier days.

Not trying to go to Heaven, Hell, Earth-Afterlife, be reborn. Those are fine for others, for most even.

I will try(and fail, but if there be others so inclined) to create a space & time of my own within the dark matter, dark energy, atoms, and energy of this celestial/uncelestial life.

It might be very well be inside one of the matrix boxes we are forced to choose from. But not on the inside, not in my heart.

Not one forced into the false dialectic of either/or, but one of how far can my mind and body take me, and how sucessful will I be avoiding those who try to stop me.

It is interesting to note that the cops that responded to the Newtown massacre (as well as in all of the other school massacres) “sat on their hands” until the shooting stopped. WHY were they not “proactive and in that building as the shooting was going on?? I guess that the “boys in blue” can’t risk getting a hangnail. Cops are only useful for taking reports AFTER the fact.

Cops get paid to go into “harms way”, but they rarely do. Cops have all this armor (and “assault weapons”) — it is easy for so-called “swat” teams to use it on unsuspecting “citizens” that are in possession of an “unauthorized” substance, but when the “rubber hits the road”, (real carnage involving innocent children) they act like wusses.
If I were there, I would have prepared myself and entered the building ASAP. That is what law enforcement is supposed to do. Law enforcement in MY country is a cruel joke. . .

During the LA riots of 1992,the police REFUSED to enter the riot zone to protect citizens,and Korean shopkeepers used “assault weapons” to hold off the rioting mob that came to burn them and their families alive in their shops/homes. that’s just ONE good reason,not that we need ANY reason to own them.
it also is justification for 30 round magazines,you need firepower to hold off a riot mob.
Not that we need any justification.

I hope the NRA does not give in to so-called “reasonable” gun control as they did with the “assault weapons ban”.
Quite often gun owners are their on worst enemies. The duck hunters don’t like “black rifles” so they don’t care if they are banned. The competitive shooters don’t like the machine gun owners (yes, there are many legally owned machine guns in the USA) so they don’t care if there are additional restrictions put on them. Let’s face it. . . ANY ban or restriction is a “slippery slope that will resuilt in the banning of ALL firearms. We need to “hang together” or we will all “hang separately”. ALL firearms enthusiasts and gun owners must band together . . .

Most people don’t see their own interests. They don’t think in principles. So they argue ‘need’ and other such things.

Ultimately IMO this isn’t about guns. It’s about stuff. It’s about individuals owning, controlling stuff. It’s about breaching that principle. Guns are just the emotional manipulation to get there. Once they get through it with guns there is no stopping them to move on to anything they wish to move on to.

Doesn’t matter what it is, there is always some tiny percentage of people that use/abuse something to the point of injury or death of themselves and others. There was a woman that died in a water drinking contest.

It’s all about getting people accept the premise that popularity contest winners have this power over stuff and we don’t.

Oh, the clovers have seen and started that game already. I’ve had clovers question why I “need” a 400-hp car, for instance.

Which brings to mind a fabulous argument I had long ago. A Clover, we’ll call him Dan*, questioned an acquaintance’s purchase of an Acura NSX…when that money could have been taxed and given to, wait for it, the “needy”. Because the NSX-owner didn’t “need” a second car.

It gets better. Later that night we went to a club, and at the parking lot was an entrepreneurial man guiding people to empty spots. As I got out, I went to give the would-be parking attendant a tip; Dan, who an hour previously had been lecturing me on “needs” and the “needy”, hissed in a loud stage whisper–“Don’t give him money, he’s a BUM!”

That is crazy, I’ve had a few similar conversations on the same level with clovers of the same caliber. I have what some consider a flaw (I consider a gift), but I usually say something completely off the cuff and rude as fuck in situations like that. Something along the lines of “Well, you’re not using your (wife, object, money) and there are plenty of needy people that could…”

The NRA (as noted above) doesn’t really existy to make gun RIGHTS an issue.
It is instead a social organization, with the same intents noted elsewhere. Its peupose is to provide the loyal opposition until Amerikans are so corrupted that they’ll willingly give up everything. NRA says Bend Over, we hand them our guns.

They are the oldest GUN CONTROL organization we have.
Rather than fight tooth and nail to ensure our freedoms are NOT encroached upon, they’d rather shmooze and booze and spout platitudes. If you have a CLUE, you know they’re blowin’ smoke up your @$$. If you don’t have a clue, you still wonder why they say it’s raining when it’s only YOUR back getting wet…

They are the same thing as we despise in our pols. Becuase they ARE POLS. Producers of nothing, takers of donor’s moneys to propagate their own power. Same as Union officials, same as party organizers, etc, etc, etc.
They are slightly less evil, but will sell us out with the same smile.
Other examples abound, too, NAACP being the biggest one.

At least the NAACP just outlived its purpose. The NRA I think ahs been corrupted to put a brake on the official Pols’ purpose when the noise gets too loud. Control both sides of the debate, control the only acceptable solution. Hegellian Dialectic, plus other means of gaining “consensus.” Tell everyone that 90% of americans want to be able to pee their pants, and the “remaining 10%” will eventually acceed – even if the numbers are completely FABRICATED. Repeat the lie often enough…

Hence the reason to shoot first and forget the questions at this point.

If you hesitate, they’ll figure out how to talk you into cutting your own throat.

The first part of the Second Amendment of the Constitution is quite often given short shrift, but actually reinforces the second part. The term “well regulated” as used in the Second Amendment had NOTHING to do with “regulation or restriction by law” and EVERYTHING to do with being a “well disciplined” marksman. The term “regulated” had a much different meaning in 18th century America.
For those misinformed individuals that say the Second Amendment only applies to flintlocks and muskets, their reasoning would also negate most of the First Amendment. By that line of “reasoning”, the First Amendment would not apply to modern high-speed offset printing nor to television, radio, or the internet.

The second amendment wasn’t primarily written for self defense against criminals. In the last century 100 million people murdered by their own government. Most of time it was preceded by gun confiscation with the promise of a utopia. A mass murderer kills only a handful people compared to a well meaning politician. Just like Stalin said; ” One death is tragedy but a million deaths are a statistic. Many will say that this will never happen here. What they don’t know is why.

Dianne Feinstein would like to frame this debate in terms of of what kind of weapon does one need to hunt game. The framers of the constitution had something entirely different in mind. That is what kind of arms are needed by the populace to protect themselves from the likes of Dianne.

In the United States of America since 1990, over 1,450 humans have died related to school bus accidents and of those about 10% were children. In the same time, ~224 people (students, faculty, gunmen, etc.) have been killed related to school shootings.

The NRA, having taken the high road, regarding Sandy Hook, has up to now, refused to engage the debate with the putrid pols Feinstein, Pilosi, Reid, and the comforter-in-chief (all lying, conniving manipulators)Unfortunately, even the NRA allows the pols to win by suggesting precisely the wrong action. That is to have a new government program where the Feds place armed security in every school. Can you see every child who enters a school receiving the obligatory feel-up from a TSA goon? The short answer is to eliminate the current federal laws which apply to guns in school zones and thereby, allow school officials to carry.

Don’t ask the Federal Gov. for anything lest you get it good and hard!

I think an even better solution would be to get rid of public schools. More schools, smaller classrooms, better education, more efficient and each private school can decide on its own security measures and parents can choose which one to send their kids to.

Community home schools and individual home schools would solve the problem as well.

I was disappointed (again) by the NRA’s statement. The presumption – again – is that only “experts” (i.e., government-anointed goons) are to be trusted with firearms in a school and so on.

The proper statement would have been something along the lines of:

Every human being has a right to defend his life. The implications of this ought to be obvious to any thinking person. Carrying a weapon for self defense is not a violation of anyone else’s rights. But taking away a person’s right to carry a weapon for self defense is. Bad things happen because there are bad people in the world. Treating good people as if they were bad people, however, only puts the good people at the mercy of bad people.

When I need to know about something from someone who I can trust, I find a geek. Others find an “authority”.

The political and social world gears itself to people who look for authorities. Authorities dress the part. They act the part. They have uniforms or titles or degrees or ranks maybe a combination of those things. They are often smooth talking and know what to say and how to say it just right. It doesn’t matter if it is correct or not, it matters how it goes over and what people think of it.

A geek tends to be awkward, quiet. He probably doesn’t dress well or if he does he over does it to point of looking silly. Well authorities look silly too without the right perceptions and maybe that’s the difference. But a geek knows his stuff backwards and forwards. You might not even understand the geek unless you take some time to learn his language. The geek won’t likely be polite about something he thinks is garbage.

Social people hence prefer authorities. Social people enjoy being bullshitted. They like the feeling of having knowledge. Of having social contacts. Geeks like knowledge and have little tolerance for bullshit. That’s why I like geeks as my source of knowledge.

So when the NRA comes out with a public statement they are making a statement to the social people, not the gun geeks. The NRA is social. It goes along to get along. The NRA people want to be invited to the parties. Not like the geek who cares more about being correct. That’s why I think gun geeks and those who rely on gun geeks have moved away from the NRA.

BrentP, I couldn’t agree with you more. Case in point: at one of my previous employers, they deployed SAP/R3 with an IT department that was still populated by Cobol / Fortran / IBM 3270 emulator “authorities.” They obviously didn’t know what they were doing, because they wiped out the bulk of our parts descriptions “because SAP was only capable of of 256 character description field” they assured us. I had a young man working with me that was a real geek; he ate, slept and breathed computers. He went online, found out how to expand the data fields and exposed the IT dept. for the buffoons they were. He then went on to perform queries and generate reports IT told our managers couldn’t be done. He’s still doing things like this today, much to the chagrin of the “authorities.”

So you are quite right in your assessment of guns and gun crime. The real experts are the people who are passionate about it, not the puff chested blow-hards hogging the microphone. At the same NRA rally where I had the displeasure of meeting Sen. “Dick” Saslaw, I was also unceremoniously elbowed out of the way and had a newscaster’s microphone taken from me by Wayne La Pierre. I’m under no illusions as to what he is. Don’t get me wrong I’m a life member of both the NRA and GOA and I support the other pro-gun organizations as I can. But belonging to the NRA to me, is like voting: I hold my nose and do it so my dissenting voice is heard through the “official” channels. It’s like Eric pointed out about open borders not too long ago; they won’t work as long as we have a welfare state catering to the FSA. The same thing here; Larry Pratt, et al, don’t have the voice the NRA does precisely because the NRA is populated with a lot of military, L.E.O.s and Republicrat politicos. So the NRA “has to work through the system” I’ve been told by some of their lawyers. But until we implement Tinsley’s preferred method of convening Grand Juries and indicting our corrupt officials (and that’s undoubtedly a one way trip to domestic drone strikes nowadays) the system is what we’re stuck with. That being said, I don’t support the big cocktail party, elbow-rubbing end of the organization; I support the NRA Institute for Legislative Action. That’s where the rubber meets the road; the laws that get (or don’t get) passed.

There’s also this inconvenient little truth that the NRA is the biggest boy on the gun rights block, worldwide, whether we like it or not. With four million members, they do wield a pretty big stick for an NGO (Non Governmental Organization). I’ve read estimates that as many as 80 million Amerikans are sympathetic to the NRA as well. Granted, that’s no match for the 150 million plus enlistees in the FSA, but it’s no slouch either. So support the passionate and zealous. But don’t forget that even though they compromise too much me thinks, the NRA despite its warts has undoubtedly been instrumental in stopping a national gun registry and outright confiscation up til now. We all write a lot here, so let’s do like we did with Autozone. Let’s put pressure on the NRA now to call for an armed “senior militia” or “geezers with guns” if you prefer, to volunteer to protect “their” schools. No more cops or worse, unsworn TSA gropers; we’ve seen what good they do and we sure as hell don’t need any more of that. So we can either maintain a certain amount of pragmatism and hang together to use the NRA’s clout as best we can or we may all hang (or more likely be shot) separately.

Boothe, I don’t have the numbers on hand but the NRA receives something like ten times the money GOA does but spends less than twice what GOA does in holding congress’s feet to the fire. The NRA is the very worst about wanting to throw other causes to the wolves to get their way, i.e., the “spray and pray” portion of the Brady Bill that can suck just about anyone in to simply get some stupid concession about having a bayonet lug AND a pistol grip on the same gun. They pulled this during the 90’s gun ban but that really bad law has been used countless times to deprive people of their property and freedom. Not a big NRA fan.

I keep seeing these graphics about putting unemployed military vets to work as guards in schools. It sounds like a bad idea to me. The military really did a number on a lot of people with multiple tours and so forth then the military treats them with the same drugs these mass-killers have been on. Sure, if they can choose the guy who was mechanic who kept the tanks running or some desk jockey from HQ I think it will be okay. If they choose the guy that the military had kill an entire village and then find the bodies of dead children… that guy might be not be the right choice for the job. There’s a reason some people have trouble re-integrating into everyday life from participating in these wars. I don’t understand why all these ‘support the troops’ people pretend the meat-grinder these people are put through doesn’t exist. I suppose because it would force them to see what the wars really are and for.

Quite right BrentP: I had a friend when I was “in” that volunteered for Viet Nam, did a couple of tours, the war ended and he got out. He wasn’t out three months and went back in; said he couldn’t make it on the outside. He was a combat meteorologist which, back then anyway, meant he went out to set up weather telemetry for air strikes on the front lines. He said after he got that part done he could go do what he really enjoyed, “blowing shit up and killing people.” Hmmm. Not the kind of guy I’d want watching over the kiddies.

No, I’m in favor of volunteer retired grandpas with CCWs roaming the halls; more like a “senior militia.” They’d have a vested interest: their own grandchildren. They would arguably be calmer, wiser and having lived a long life already, would have less to lose when considering facing off with an active shooter. I’ll bet you’d get a couple of dozen senior applicants in the Sandy Hook school district within hours of soliciting for volunteers. But young, PTSD addled ground pounders returning from the Middle East looking for a job? Not such a good idea. As Coop so aptly pointed out above, cops (SROs) manning our schools haven’t panned out too well. I vote for an all volunteer and well armed Senior Militia. The wanton shooting would stop immediately.

I’m waiting for them to put lots of remotely controlled gun emplacements in schools, sort of static drones operated from police stations so they can guarantee instant response to this sort of thing. (I don’t think I’m giving them ideas, it’s that obvious.)

Of course, one day there will be a computer glitch or a hacker will get in and be able to carry out a massacre without any risk, and on a vastly larger scale, too.

Just a couple of questions:
1)If guns kill people, what is the number people who have died in traffic accidents this week? We need to ban cars if the number is too high.
2)I have yet to hear how many drugs this kid was taking. Could that have affected his mind.
3)Let me save the govt panel of gun crime some time and money. Send the TSA to defend our schools. It would free up our airports and makes our schools safer. Send the check to the red cross.
Respectfully,
M.Mitchell

I got rid of the last M.A.D.D. fundraiser when I suggested that due to the 200,000 annual deaths due to medical errors and prescription medication side effects and interactions that M.A.D.D. rename itself to Mothers Against Dumb Doctors and attack a real problem.

Sadly, she hung-up on me and they haven’t called since. (I was hoping to try again)

In any case, due to errors and prescription drugs, the medical establishment is committing a Sandy Hook an hour and no one in the media appears to be the least bit concerned.

Elite Neo-Nazis … Is Russia Today (RT) Part of the Controlled Media Matrix and the Imposition of Global Government?

One other thought I’d add:
Many People have trouble accepting there are large and powerful families controlling and manipulating things on the world stage from behind the scenes – while at the same time – the exact same thing takes place every day in most american cities:

It’s common for a rich and powerful local family to own the largest and oldest companies in small town america. If that family wants a new city park they call up their friends on the city council and it gets done.
No one calls that a conspiracy, yet when the exact same thing takes place om a national level by more powerful families, suddenly things are different?

Ok, now that my blood pressure is back down to three digits I can go about my day. Thanks for the outlet guys.

I have to admit I’m getting awfully tired of hearing people I respected a week ago regurgitate illogical, anti-liberty anti-gun propaganda now that the view-screen is telling them to a little bit harder than it was before. More infuriating is the fact that they always say it as if they can’t imagine anyone ever disagreeing with them in their new-found collectivist piety. So, to avoid punching people who used to be my friends in their respective smug mis-educated faces, I’m posting this here:

1. The second amendment (and indeed the entire bill of rights) does not grant any rights, it merely recognizes the preexisting right of every man to protect himself.

2. By “protect himself,” I don’t mean from deer, I mean from police, soldiers, and other criminals.

3. Making things illegal doesn’t make them disappear, it just makes them more expensive. See: every good or service that has ever been illegal anywhere on Earth at any time in history for proof.

4. Making “dangerous” guns illegal guarantees that only those willing to break the law will have “dangerous” guns.

5. Cops, even mythological “good” cops, cannot protect anyone from anything. They can only show up after you’re dead to draw chalk outlines and pose for cameras.

Ok, now that my blood pressure is back down to three digits I can go about my day. Thanks for the outlet guys.

The children and others being killed was a horrible tragedy, but the media has focused their lenses on those 26 Americans for days now – to the point of being a defacto memorial for them – while almost daily the Amerikan military kills as many if not more in Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan.

As if the heart-break and mourning of American parents is valued while that of foreign parents is inconsequential.

Isn’t it amazing, even scary, just how conditioned people are? They say things like: without cops who would protect us? Even though they nor anyone they know has EVER been “protected” by a cop. Even though every tragedy is followed by the cops, not preceeded by them.

Or, without welfare programs people would be dying in the streets. Even though they nor anyone they know has ever known anyone (not mentally disturbed) who died in the street because they didn’t get a welfare check.

Delusion is defined as believing an alternative reality in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

I was at a major NRA rally at the Capitol in Richmond, Virginia in the mid 90’s. We went in to see Senator Richard “Dick” Saslaw. The first thing I noted about him was his foul mouth in front of my wife; hardly a “Virginia Gentleman” (hence “Dick” being a very appropriate pseudonym). “Dick” explained to us that guns were bad and they (the Demoplicans) were going to do everything they could to take them away. I countered with valid and logical points and he went into this tirade. “They” had a weather balloon tethered off the coast of Florida with a camera on it watching all the boats coming and going. For every boat that the Coast Guard caught carrying “drugs” something like seven slipped by. That was the reason, according to “Dick”, that we had the gun violence problem. So the only thing we could do is outlaw guns. So I pointed out that “drugs” had already been outlawed and that didn’t stop them from flowing in. And that if guns were outlawed, just like drugs, they would become so valuable that each of those boats would now carry half a cargo bay of cocaine and half a cargo bay of South American guns. His logical, tempered and well though out response was, “Well if you like guns, you’d better buy them now!”

I agree wholeheartedly with the good Senator. We should also outlaw snow because it makes the roads less safe, and sex because it spreads disease, and food because it causes diabetes and heart disease, and breathing because it pollutes the planet with deadly, deadly CO2. Then life would be perfect.

Did anybody catch Capital Account with Lauren Lyster on RT the other day?

What I thought was the most libertarian financial press site (on TV anyway) had the host Lauren, and the Producer, Demitri both asking “Why does anybody need an assault rifle?” They both agreed that nobody does (except I guess – the police and military) – but now I’m just being redundant.

I liked that show. Not any more. Anybody who asks such a question must logically feel that the American Revolution was an unjust war.

How far would the founders have gotten if the British Empire was allowed cannons but the colonists, under arms control, were limited to muskets?

There is already far more “arms” control than the founders ever envisioned. Don’t believe me – try and buy an armed predator drone – or an armed missile.

Although I haven’t done any research – I think the probability of me legally buying one is 0, assuming I could actually afford it.

RT Network has 2 million UK viewers, who they must cater to. Many of these are helpful Daffodils who want us to have the kind of social system Snuggy to live under like they do.

I do watch RT news, its a high fructose dose of 30 Minutes Hate with highly informative eye candy.

RT is one of the most powerful and effective media properties in the world. I would assume Russia like most nations force their slaves to fund this type of state television through a forced television tax.

Its excellence leads me to think the Russian Orthodox fascist church state is re-emerging as a productive economic superpower.
Makes all our battleships and carriers look kinda…soviet.

It was an unjust war, but not for that reason, for the reasons I gave in an earlier comment above, that it was actually setting up a tyranny – what’s happening now isn’t a later corruption of an ideal, it was the theory and practice from the very beginning. It might seem a clever rhetorical trick to call on that precedent to trip up the current would-be tyrants in their contradictions, by showing that they thought an earlier resistance was proper, but beware: they could turn it round and trap you in the contradiction of endorsing setting up a tyranny.

“that it was actually setting up a tyranny – what’s happening now isn’t a later corruption of an ideal, it was the theory and practice from the very beginning.”

From what I’ve read, I think this is inaccurate. I don’t have good sourcing, but I’ve read that the Articles of Confederation originally forming the US were to be re-written in the Constitutional Convention; instead, Madison scrapped the whole thing and wrote into law the same banker-controlled system the Colonies had just forcibly thrown off.
In other words, there WAS a coup that we’re never told about.

So you’re correct if you mean the theory and practice of the Constitution, but not so much from the Articles of Confederation standpoint.
I need to do research on the Articles, though…

And given the standard intelligence of Boobus Americuntus, I WOULD endorse a tyranny over them… You don’t give a 5-year-old the keys to the Mustang and a fifth of whiskey.
We were unable to keep the Republic, per Franklin.

I had an interesting debate earlier today with a gang of clovers who tried to convince me that if I don’t lock my guns in a safe and a burglar steals them I would be guilty of negligent homicide if the gun gets used in a murder.

It was really quite a joke. Somehow it’s my fault that a criminal breaks into my house, steals my property and murders someone. Supposedly I left a deadly weapon unattended as if I left it at the park or something.

Some of these clovers are gun owners and one owns a number of “Assault Rifles”.

Not that I ever argued that people should be careful about their guns. I simply stated that I had not committed a crime the piece of dirt who broke in did and that my House is my safe. Everything and anything in it is mine and anyone who violates that space takes any and all responsibility for entering. Honestly even if while shooting the SOB I miss and would a neighbor it’s still that asswads fault.

Of course that really pissed them off. I pointed out that no cop would be responsible for shooting a bystander while protecting their life. Nope of course porky pig with his badge and costume has rights that I don’t.

Seriously, clovers are the most fucked up people and they are responsible for most of what if messed up in this country.

Hey Brad. I’m on your side and believe that it SHOULD be their fault if they steal your gun and shoot someone and it will be. You will also be at fault though. That’s the law here in Virginia. When I took my gun safety course the instructor said “If someone steals your gun and commits a crime with it be prepared to lose everything you own and go to jail.”

Some states have it set up that if you don’t call and report it missing then you are in trouble. I guess I would do that just to get it on record that I no longer have it. You know in case some idiot did use it.

It’s the same here with a car. If someone uses it and commits offences, YOU as the owner (owner onus) are liable until you prove otherwise, but nobody knowing your safe combination, cutting it open and going on a killing spree leaves you exonerated. Well fuck me – there IS some common sense left.

In any case, if criminals want to get firearms, they will, from other criminals. It happens Down Under all the time. Only the cops and crims here have weapons (sans farmers and target shooters), but cops and crims are pretty much the same these days, looking at all the corruption around me.

It’s a shame your country has fallen to the level it has freedom wise. Most countries seem to be following suit albeit at a slower pace.

The only things that accelerate loss of freedom are apathy and leftist ideals.

Define reasonable.
Now define it so that you can twist it to persecute anyonw you don’t like.

That wasn’t so hard, was it?
Now you can sue the dog for witchcraft that caused the gun to jump into the burglar’s pocket, taking the entire safe (and the wall that it was boted to, plus a nice chunk of concrete) with it, and then it forced that poor innocent Urban Explorer to go on a killing spree…

While your friend John up the street, who hangs his full-auto Ma Deuce on the wall, and has ammo stockpiled in the kitchen – he’s EXEMPT from those laws, even if he GIVES it to a psychotic who intends to commit mass murder…

Stupidity should be painful, and more often, fatal. So should duplicity.
There’s a cure for sociopathy…

If one is liable for a murder committed by a person who broke into your home and stole your gun to perform the deed, then why would one not also be liable for a vehicular homicide committed by someone who stole one’s car?

As screwy as things are, I suspect there needs to be some sort of provable negligence or recklessness – for example, leaving an unattended loaded gun sitting in plain view in a public area – before the gun owner can be draped with the blame for mayhem caused by someone else using his gun.

Hey Eric,
You actually predicted this scenario in your previous essays. Those sociopaths in the US government in DC and in the corporate media of NY are ingenious. No one in world history will be able to outdo their finesse and abilities using both propaganda and mind control. The Nazi regime and Stalinist Russia have nothing on these guys.

This use of the mass shooting event, with the ‘kids aspect’ as you have stated before in previous columns, and their gradualist methods that they have always been using, is now being transformed into a mythologized event as a way to restart the gun control activity.

They tried their nefarious strategies with the gunwalker-Narco strategy and it backfired. They have been trying to move the round up of guns more forward, like they have been trashing the other Bill of Rights amendments to the Constitution recently. They are using once again the old solution that has always worked well in the past – a corporate media hysteria campaign. Yes, even with all of our alternative voices on the Internet, most Americans still get their intelligence, information, imagination and ideas from the TV set.

This whole corporate media-US government campaign is not like the former and typical gun control attacks from the usual suspects: Bloombag, Feinbrine, etc., normally after mass shootings and usually done by psychotropic drug proscribed people. The evil authorities like psychobabble pseudo-science, so they are not going to ban psychotropic ‘biotech’ drugs anytime soon. And No, the sociopaths in power did not set this up as a few bloggers have alluded to. They are using the event, just like the attack on the World Trade Towers, the Crack-Drug epidemic, (Len Bias basketball death which was do mixing multiple substances not just Crack Cocaine), with the Black Criminal class in the 70s and 80s, and the Communist threat in the late 40s and 50s, etc., as a media mythological event.

What I mean by mythology is a term we historians use in documenting ‘false community’ events set up in the modern societies. Again, the US govt. sociopaths, the corporate media in NY, and Hollywood in LA have been the ultimate propaganda masters in these ignoble methods. Think the moves to influence the US in getting involved in WWI or WWII.

These national mythologies are created when they turn actual events in something more significant than they actually are. A tragic event simply gets signified a couple of times over, and it becomes a type of super event that gives a common community and false consensus to a media hype movement where actually most people are atomized and alienated from each other. This is especially true in American society and culture where there are extreme individualist tendencies, so these types of mythology-events-media hypes-community consensus forums are quite powerful emotional moments for a lot of insecure, ignorant and cowardly citizens.

A disturbed shooter on some hard psychotropic drugs steals handguns from his mother in order to murder his mother, and then he gets a high from the murderous act, and soon decides to go to an easy ‘gun-free’ zone, associated with his mother, in order to commit more murders. How does this event actually relate to ‘assault gun rifle bans’ which the US govt. and the usual statist-Liberals, whether Left-wing or Conservative, now support?

Being a responsible gun owner as yourself, I am dismayed at this mythology event orchestration because it will mean that we will have to hide our weapons even more. But haven’t we been writing about the tyranny and mass murder of these sinister despots before? Do we truly expect anything less from them? I like the comfort of my own warm and spacious apartment too, but eventually, those of us who refuse to sacrifice their honor and dignity, are going to have to face up to the actual physical combat ahead. I have served in the US military, but I have never been actual combat. I was a clerk in an office. I don’t even know what to think about it.

The sociopaths in power are gunning for us, and many US govt. agencies have been stockpiling their millions of rounds of ammo with lots of high powered guns recently. They desperately want to murder us citizens that will not submit. I am not a violent person and will always refuse to escalate a bar altercation. I just walk away, but we have both been writing about their tactics, and we have seen it coming. We won’t be able to walk away from powerful sociopaths that have the legal rights in exterminating people, whether through drones in Afghanistan, or with police attacks on our homes. The violent conflict is moving faster towards us. And like I have stated before, they are very nervous and paranoid about us. Most people will fall into line and into acts of cowardice, hopefully we will not join them.

Ever heard about the Kansas Jayhawks and the little war they had with Arkansas?

“Confederated at first for defense against pro-slavery outrages, but ultimately falling more or less completely into the vocation of robbers and assassins, they have received the name — whatever its origin may be — of jayhawkers.”

“A disturbed shooter on some hard psychotropic drugs steals handguns from his mother in order to murder his mother, and then he gets a high from the murderous act, and soon decides to go to an easy ‘gun-free’ zone, associated with his mother, in order to commit more murders.”

Very neat encapsulation of the MSM tale. Note, however, that the tale was arrived at in stages, with little to no mention of the drugs.

The setup to the massacre was pretty clumsy, and only prompt action by the news media and the police officials made it possible to concoct the official tale. That tale was concocted piecemeal onscreen by the anchors who traveled to the scene to do their reporting.

John Rappoport does a fine job of describing the way the tale was concocted.

The most standard form of mind control is repetition. The commonestly seen type of mind control – that’s repetition. Number one most commonly used form of mind control is repetition. Pretty girls like you to know that the cutting edge form of mind control, is alpha male repetition. Concerned officials want everyone to be aware that most of the kinds of mind control that occur are a variation. DONT YOU BEFUDDLED KEYBOARD JOCKEY SHEEPLE GET IT YET THAT: Thee! most! standard! form! of mind! control! is! repetition!
My…favorite…shatner…quote…is…”Spock?!…my friend…I’m dying…its…too…late…I’m…dying…from the most deadly form of mind control ever tried…the repetition….

A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what’s going on. A psychotic is a guy who’s just found out what’s going on.”
~ William S. Burroughs

Indeed, Bevin. Humor is actually one of the best weapons against groupthink. Political correctness has circumscribed the permissible limits of humor for that very reason. The PTB are so intent on having us bow to them that the last thing they can tolerate is our laughing at them. Which I do at every opportunity, of course.

[3]
Reg: All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
Attendee: Brought peace?
Reg: Oh, peace – shut up!
Reg: There is not one of us who would not gladly suffer death to rid this country of the Romans once and for all.
Dissenter: Uh, well, one.
Reg: Oh, yeah, yeah, there’s one. But otherwise, we’re solid.

The little girl’s head had been split by a machete. A long ragged suture ran from her left eye across her ruined skull. Her breath fluttered shallow and light, and her frail body seemed to cling to the world of the living with no more than a butterfly’s strength.

”We found the baby between the bodies of the parents,” the girl’s aunt, Esperance Dusabi, said, wiping blood from the child’s head in the green light of a hospital tent. ”They killed my younger sister, her husband, their children. This is the only survivor. I don’t know how I can describe them. These are people who want to exterminate all of mankind.”

– New York Times

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan did nothing to stop this genocide, and now the UN wants to make it impossible for all citizens to defend themselves – by banning guns.

Nuns tell of machete horror

17 APRIL 1994

‘Two of our Rwandan Tutsi sisters begged the Belgian soldiers to shoot them right there at the airport. They said they did not want to die by the machete,’ said Maria Pilar Crousielles, a Spanish nun flown out of Rwanda.

She was describing to reporters at Madrid airport how Belgian soldiers, under orders not to accept Rwandans, had to leave her local colleagues – two Tutsis and two Hutus – behind at Kigali airport.

‘The sisters knew full well that the machete is a terrible death. They keep chopping at the head until they hit the jugular.’ Sister Maria witnessed the massacre of members of Rwanda’s Tutsi minority by Hutu tribesmen last week. ‘I saw children with their heads already hacked out of shape, begging us for help because the Hutus were trying to finish them off. I saw men and women with their throats cut.’

– The Independent

Obama and leftist freaks don’t understand this basic fact: People will continue to kill people, using whatever weapon they have to hand. If gun-free zones are banned, the threat of mass killings occurring will approach zero.

Obama and leftist freaks don’t understand this basic fact: People will continue to kill people…

Olaf, the understand it perfectly well–it is not by ignorance or idealism that they act.

They KNOW disarmament causes democide, and they WANT it–because they’re the ones who do the democide!

These are, in psychiatric clinical terms, very sick fucks we’re dealing with. They LIKE killing people; they and their kind have killed over 250 million people in the last hundred years, and they’re coming up on another round.

Their less-than-completely-sick-fuck minions like disarmament because they relish the dependence it creates.

Remember Stalin’s chicken? It may be apocryphal but: Stalin was once asked how he ruled so effectively despite being a complete tyrant. He ordered a chicken brought to him, and proceeded to pluck it–a violent and painful act. The pitiful chicken ran from its tormenter when he put it down; but it quickly returned and huddled against his leg for warmth.

800,000 Rwandans Killed By Dangerous Metal Objects – I’ve read some about that terrible event, but nothing as detailed as that, it really brings it home as to what gun control means,… and what it says about those who desire it.

Hi Olaf. Thanks for posting this article. I hadn’t heard of the incident and would imagine that only a tiny percentage of Americans know about it. It just doesn’t fit in with the narrative that the presstitutes in the MSM are trying to weave.

Please read the article about the drones, mon frere.
If drones kill any people “over there” who have weapons, like quacking ducks in a shooting gallery. Why’s it gonna be any different here?

>>> Exerpt <<<

…Bryant preferred night shifts, because that meant it was daytime in Afghanistan. In the spring, the landscape, with its snow-covered peaks and green valleys, reminded him of his native Montana. He saw people cultivating their fields, boys playing soccer and men hugging their wives and children.

When it got dark, Bryant switched to the infrared camera. Many Afghans sleep on the roof in the summer, because of the heat. "I saw them having sex with their wives. It's two infrared spots becoming one," he recalls.

He observed people for weeks, including Taliban fighters hiding weapons, and people who were on lists because the military, the intelligence agencies or local informants knew something about them.

"I got to know them. Until someone higher up in the chain of command gave me the order to shoot." He felt remorse because of the children, whose fathers he was taking away. "They were good daddies," he says.

In his free time, Bryant played video games or "World of Warcraft" on the Internet, or he went out drinking with the others.

That reminds me, if some families were going to be in a phyle, they’d want to all spit in the same soup together from time to time. And include strong microbes from somewhere far away, to be on the same strong page biologically. Lick each others cats fur that contain a specially engineered dander.
If your phyle eats commodo dragon crap, & concentrated bile like its hersheys chocolate, you can be like Cortez in the Mayan pools of the 12th baktun.

Unwanteds, spies trying to infiltrate, clovers, they’ll have a tough time with the “commodo” mickey everyone else doesn’t even notice in their salad.

These clover control freak leftists are full of hubris and think they have it all wrapped up. They are going for it all during the second term of dingle Barry from Kenya. Don’t forget to think freeloader layabouts in the 47% who sold their own country out so they could have a cushy comfortable union job and peanuts welfare checks.

Terrorists took out 4 passenger jets because they knew it was a gun-free zone – with box cutters. Unfortunately, none of the drooling morons that want gun control can ask the victims what THEY would like to do about it.

The New York Times
June 28, 2005
Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone
By LINDA GREENHOUSE

WASHINGTON, June 27 – The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.

The decision, with an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia and dissents from Justices John Paul Stevens and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, overturned a ruling by a federal appeals court in Colorado. The appeals court had permitted a lawsuit to proceed against a Colorado town, Castle Rock, for the failure of the police to respond to a woman’s pleas for help after her estranged husband violated a protective order by kidnapping their three young daughters, whom he eventually killed.

Right on Bevin. I paint this illustration for “good” Amerikans that still believe in the gun-vernment and their goons: I you were laying in the ditch on fire and ______ (insert choice: B.O., Pelosi, Reid, Clinton…) was riding by in their limo and saw you, do you honestly believe they would stop and piss on you? Do believe they would even ask their driver to stop and let him piss on you? If your answer is no (and if thou art true to thine own self, then it will be NO!) then you have a pretty good idea how concerned they are for the rest of us. When it comes to our elitist would-be rulers and owners, as Celente says, it’s not about justice, it all about “Just us.”

Good thought, but that’s really just the way we’re supposed to see them. In fact, cops are nothing more than goons. Journalists (back when there still were journalists in the mainstream media) referred to a top mafia goon as an “enforcer”.

That’s what cops are, enforcers of the will of politicians. It takes a criminal mindset to do the job, which is why so many cops commit crimes other than the ones they are supposed to be permitted to commit in the course of their “jobs”.

Imagine a stenographer who is functionally illiterate, or a janitor who refuses to clean up anything……

I worked in the budget office for the state of FL out of college and my job was to estimate revenues. Estimating revenues for the Florida State Highway Patrol was easy since it was as much or as little as they wanted it to be by just writing more citations and confiscating more property. And citation quotas were a matter of policy so all I had to do was call them and ask them what they were planning on doing next year.

If they said their policy was to increase the quota by 5% then I estimated their revenues to be 5% higher as well.

So basically a cop is out engaging in legalized highway robbery in order to pay his salary for engaging in legalized highway robbery. It’s all perverted.

I am a law abiding citizen. I have never been convicted of a crime. I have no mental illness that I am aware of. I am very well trained on all of the weapons I own. Yet there are people who would use the force of government to take away my right to defend myself. They would turn the very guns they despise against me. They would use deadly force with a gun if necessary to take not only my weapons but my right to defend myself from criminals and from tyrants.

They would leave me unarmed and at the mercy of criminals and tyrants and feel good about it! That is what really chaps my ass!

The presence of guns under the control of responsible, trained people reduces the possibility of violent crime to almost zero. No one pulls out a weapon in a gun shop – you would have to be a complete moron to do that.

Irrational leftists believe that the way to protect children is to ban the one thing which can keep them safe. Are children less valuable than a bank account? Children deserve better than the mentally defective people running our government.

The world is full of nutcases. Lefties can either deal with it or stick their heads up their arses in their imaginary Bambi world.

That is a keeper for sure. Just perfect! Although I don’t post a lot with you guys I do read through most of what’s happening. I have to say the dialogues that go on here are absolutely amazing and I’m really honored to be a part of it!

Just make an account and login. then you can view the comments from most recent to oldest, page after page. That’s how I do it.

Web forums are really a decline as far as I am concerned. I don’t see why it’s so difficult just to copy the way a decent usenet newsreader worked. But nobody does. a couple decades of refining internet discussion lost.

Wish I could. Believe it or not, that darn recent comments block (What’s Happening?) taxes our server more than anything else on the site! I’ve toyed with with number of comments displayed and character length cutoff etc.. The way it’s set right now is for 7 comments, 140 characters, and 30 character word wrap seems to be optimum. I had it at 10 comments displayed before and noticed longer page load speeds and massive server taxing. Everything on this main page (not including the forum, or clovercam) is continually cached on the server for fast loads, but the recent comments block can’t be or the ones we’d see would be old. On a slam busy day we have 10,000 unique visits and each time someone visits or refreshes any page on this site that table and records are being called. Sorry, more information than you probably wanted to know. Any page load time issues noticed on this site I’d say 90% of the time are because than darn comments block. We have the forum which is the ultimate kick ass software, but we haven’t figured out how to get people to use it. To be completely honest we’re at the point of needing to upgrade our server again. Don’t tell Eric! I understand and do agree that it’s getting extremely hard to keep up and have problems myself!

I didn’t mean to sound critical, but technical :).
Where it says guest up in the top band, click there. It will let you make an account. Once it’s made you can click on the cartoon talking balloon and then see all the comments. Click on the time stamp to go to the comment.

Based on the clearly visible evidence (which includes the fact that the majority of children today are left to rot in violent, dysfunctional government kiddie-prisons by their absentee parents), the painfully obvious answer is a resounding YES.

Of course the majority are too disgustingly dishonest and deluded to admit this to themselves or anyone else.

Your children are definitely less valuable than my bank account, if we are talking about similar levels of damage done to them. Even if a ten year old boy broke his leg, he would be as right as rain in a few weeks, but if I lost even A$100 from my bank account I might be evicted in a few weeks (I’m close to the wire and the rent’s due next week, but I won’t get any more income until the week after that).

I wonder if there are any reports of citizens defending their lives and homes by retaliating against these goons? If like here you hear precious little because it doesn’t jibe with the politically correct indoctrination being fed through the media.

HOWEVER, it appears that crims still have Rights, where if you use excessive force you might end up being hammered by the law as well. Even the cops say that during armed hold-ups at service stations you should just let the crook take what he wants and let the cops look after it. They actually advocate you curl up in the corner and let the crime take place.

there’s a change in tactics:
…….the training they have been receiving over the last five years, they have been taught that ANY engagement of an active shooter — even shots that don’t hit the shooter — are now believed among law enforcement to disrupt the shooter and force him to seek cover, during which his massacre is interrupted and delayed. Where police have traditionally been trained to “confirm your sight picture” of weapon sights on the target before pulling the trigger, that training is being modified in some cities where, in the context of a mass shooter firing off a large number of rounds, even returning so-called “suppressing fire” is now considered tactically acceptable until additional backup arrives. The idea now is to go in and engage the shooter, even if you’re just one officer on the scene.

This is contradictory to previous training, and it goes against most cops’ safety rules which include, “always know what is BEYOND your target.” But tacticians in law enforcement are apparently now figuring out that the opportunity cost of NOT shooting back is much greater than the relatively small risk of hitting an innocent victim when laying down suppressing fire.

Funny, how I live in an area where every second or third person you meet on the street is carrying, and yet there hasn’t been a SINGLE school massacre here. Gosh, ya think there’s a correlation between those two facts? (By the way, the only reason the Gabby Giffords shooting happened –apart from the fact that it was pretty obviously a failed false-flag event in the same mold as the Sandy Hook and Aurora shootings– is that LibDem gun-grabbin’ Gabby insisted on there being no firearms at the event. Only the fact that one person in attendance had decided “fuck you, Gabby!” and brought his pistol with him anyway prevented there from being more victims. I’d like to say “I’ll bet she’ll never do THAT again,” but I have no reason to believe that Jared Loughner’s bullet, in rearranging Gabby’s gray matter, did anything to knock any sense into her head.)

Are the Phoenix and Tucson areas a concern? What about St. David and Fort Huachuca? I like Arizona’s political stance and climate but as I haven’t lived there in some years I’m curious about the current situation there. Any advice?

No need for CCW permit in AZ since mid-2010. We can carry concealed regardless. I have debated whether to renew mine when it comes due. The only factor that may sway me toward the renewal side is the reciprocal laws in other states that recognie the AZ permit. Then, again, why should we have to ask permission to provide for our own defense?
The internal debate continues.

Go back and look again, my friend. Arizona, like Wyoming and Vermont, no longer require any “permit” for concealed carry. There are still various restrictions regarding WHERE you can CC, and some of those states have a residency requirement, but no “permit” is needed if you can legally own or carry a gun at all.

I live in Wyoming, and have carried openly for many years. I carry CC occasionally now because I need to practice it, but OC is preferred.

Texas, especially it’s government, for all of it’s false image of the rugged independent individual, speaks out of both sides of its mouth. If the populace would knuckle down on those clowns in Austin then maybe some sense could be driven home.

Ouch! And that’s a painful observation I witnessed first hand for decades. This was in Midland of course. They love to hoot and holler about “the Alamao” and such bullshit but those cats have been dead for nearly two centuries and I don’t gather the ones alive today have any idea what kind of sacrifices are needed now.

Back in the SUV craze, in autos forums, people would defend their choice of a smoothvee by saying they needed to tow something or went off road once every five years or some other contortion. They would go back and forth with these people who said SUVs are not needed etc and so on. My take was for the SUV owners to just admit they wanted it. All I _needed_ was a bicycle I would point out. Everything else I wanted. I could get by with just a bicycle.

Using correct language is important. By telling these people who think they can tell you what you need flat out you wanted it so you got it is IMO the best way of dealing with it. Arguing need is a long tiresome process that goes nowhere and gives others power. It’s some stupid social thing that people have to justify themselves to others. If someone wants an AR-15, go buy one. I don’t care. Don’t tell me or anyone else how it is needed. That’s just asking for an argument. I or anyone else can offer all sorts of different solutions for ‘need’. Want is by definition personal and individual. Need is like some subjective opinion and everyone has an opinion.

Sure, people ‘need’ food. But someone doesn’t need to have a steak. And if framed in terms of need someone will have an opinion about eating steak. I am becoming a real stickler for language in these days of newspeak. Not for grammar or spelling, but for meaning. Use the correct words. I want a steak. I don’t need one. If we use their words, they get the high ground. They change the words the culture uses to give themselves power. Where they, the managers of the collective, can sit in judgment.

I wanted this so this is what I got it. The end. There’s no argument for them to make that doesn’t make them look like control freaks who has to tell other people their needs. Accepting their terms of arguing ‘need’ gives them leverage.

That’s a great point, Brent. Excellent in fact; George Orwell was keenly aware that the entire scope of not just debate, but one’s entire scope of thought could be controlled by curtailing and corrupting language.

If you can’t verbalize opposition, you can’t contemplate much less plan it.

And so, they’ve dumbed down the language, then perverted the remaining terms into such contortions it’s difficult to even express the correct logic.

And when you do–the idiots listening to your argument can’t comprehend it, because the terms are so overloaded with garbage it doesn’t compute for them.

I have Orwells ‘Essays’ by Everyman in hardback. Within this 1400 page tome you’ll find a treasure trove of insight. In his essay about Politics and the English language he quite correctly said “Political language. . . is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”

Back in the SUV craze, in autos forums, people would defend their choice of a smoothvee by saying they needed to tow something or went off road once every five years or some other contortion. They would go back and forth with these people who said SUVs are not needed etc and so on. My take was for the SUV owners to just admit they wanted it. All I _needed_ was a bicycle I would point out. Everything else I wanted. I could get by with just a bicycle.

Exactly, Brent! I’m REALLY rapidly getting sick and tired of brainless Clover busybodies telling me, or others who just want to be left alone to live our lives and acquire and maintain our own property as we see fit, that I “don’t need” something. To which my response is, GO FUCK YOURSELF. It is absolutely NONE of anyone else’s concern what I or any other free person acquires and owns. If society’s concern were to be based solely on “need” as the primary consideration for property ownership, then mankind would still be living in caves and eating raw meat and uncooked vegetables – assuming that mankind still existed at all.

The next time some Clovertard busybody tries to hector you with shaming language on what you “need” as opposed to what you want and can afford to acquire and maintain with your own money and resources without impinging on the rights and property of anyone else, tell them that they NEED to shut the fuck up and leave you alone!

Although Marx accidentally popularised the phrase by using it, he was actually using it to characterise a kind of socialist he was criticising. That is, he thought it it did not fit a time before socialism had been made to work, and that therefore those socialists who recommended it as current policy were putting the cart before the horse.

Absolutely spot on BrentP! We liberty minded people have logic and facts on our side. But they are not effective unless we also have the language on our side as well.

Words mean things. But the busy bodies of the world contort their meanings so as to control the terms of the debate. We must retake control by insisting on clear definitions because libtards base their arguments on emotions and therefore simply can not intelligently articulate the meaning of the words they use.

Ask Piers Morgan to define what specifically is an “assault weapon”. Ask him to define what a “free and secure state” means. Or what does “liberty” mean. Etc. Readers here can define these terms. Govbots can not.

Make them define and defend their language and then their position. They can not do it and be logical at the same time.

And may I also add we need to use mockery as often as we can. Nothing sends a self-righteous do gooder into a frenzy more than a refusal to accept their “superiority”. E.g. use gubment instead of government; The Dear Leader vs. president oboma (I always use lower case letters and deliberate misspellings as a way to also show disrespect); tell me Dear Comrade… etc.

One more thing – always try to get others to question authority, as we here already do. The best way to do this is to frame everything in the form of a question. And the best question to ask is the one that best exposes hypocrisy: By what authority does one man have to deny another man a right for which he himself would not want to be denied to himself?

That blurring of meaning ship has already sailed. A couple of centuries ago “want” meant pretty much what “need” does now, which you still sometimes see in such expressions as “people in want”, but then the meaning got softened. All you’re describing is the same softening and blurring continuing – but it already got under way with “want” itself.

By the way, did you see the CNN bit with Piers Morgan debating GOA’s Larry Pratt?:

Larry Pratt has his stuff together, now.
I can’t say enough good things about how this man acted in this ‘situation’ I’m not sure I would’ve been close to being that cool. Talk about a rational thinking man vs. a man acting like a child, this was it.

That was a prime example of out-calming and out-debating a hostile, arrogant asshole.

Read the comments below the video on YouTube; 100 to 1, they’re pro-Pratt and heavily against Morgan.

Morgan killed himself on that interview; I’ve never seen a worse performance. His smarmy Brit accent was not enough to cover for a disgraceful “debate”…only the worst kind of idiot (a daily CNN viewer) would fall for it.

But since most “school” buses (a euphemism for “juvenile prison transports”) are the property of and under the control of the State, such incidents get a free pass and are quietly swept under the media rug.

My local gun range in the unitedstates (not Switzerland) is often filled with idiots and morons shooting high capacity weapons while standing next to quite normal People. In the many decades the range has been in use there’s not been a single accident or crime in all that time.

And, up until a year ago, there wasn’t a state-bully, er, I mean a ranger master at the gun range.

All that freedom, and All those guns being fired, and not a single crime.

Anti-gunners are stuck in some kind of warped twisted thinking processes, or they have an agenda. Either way, there’s something wrong with those People, imho.

No one considers that the King routinely orders the deaths of the same number of children with his “secret” drone strikes that all always seem to “go astray.” That’s all collateral damage and all within the bounds of the mission, whatever the mission is.

Btw, I think that the Swiss can still keep their automatics at home but they are no longer issue ammunition to keep with it. They claimed that too many guys were offing themselves with their rifles so now the guns are rendered useless. But your point remains: no “gun crime” in the cantons (just lots of control freak clovers who will assail you if your trash can is 2 inches closer to the street than it should be).

There is virtually no “gun crime” in Switzerland, even though the Swiss are armed to the teeth, with full-auto military combat rifles in the hands of nearly every adult male between the ages of 18 and 45?

Not quite, though it doesn’t affect the point at issue. The way I last heard it – a while back, and it may have changed since then – they actually have regularly inspected, sealed lockers of weapons and ammunition, that aren’t immediately accessible. That’s not enough to give them ready home defence against intruders (say), but I think the point here was that they could easily use them for gun crime themselves – which is true enough.

Sorta like saying wars dont increase the deathrate,however I see your point,objects in of themselves are not intriniscally evil.It tales Morons so to speak or “MAL DICTUM” TO perpretrate violence.
An English teacher or professor gave me a little schooling on where the long arm of the law got a big start,in the Wild,Wild,West-(which werent really like the Hollywood depictions People used to keep the peace themselves themselves and it worked pretty well until some folks decided to hire a bully with a gun and pass the buck to him,so it was off and running ,till it culminated in what we have now.
I dont advocate anarchy,but I believe in the state motto of VA.”Sic Semper Tyrannus” which by the way the state gov’t doesnt adhere to.I kinda think maybe Guy Fawkes was on the right track-Kevin
P.S. It would be nice to not to have to watch my step all the time ,so’s not to end up back in “the governors school for the gifted” aka”the joint”

All areas of the Aussie gubberment are drooling like idiots over Newtown at the moment. They want the US to follow suit to their “brainy” schemes, whereby we’ve had gun buy-backs, amnesty’s and so-on, where all the weapons were recycled.

Just stupid.

Now all we have are police and criminals with guns – all crooks.

Apparently, the kid at Newtown was “buzzed in” to the school (correct me if I’m wrong). Doesn’t take more than a brick to bash through a locked glass door.

Just thought it might be somewhat relevant. Rebecca Peters is now in San Francisco on a lecture tour. She was interviewed on a local radio station. I didn’t catch the entire program so I can’t speak to much of the content, but it is the sort of thing that makes me go “Hmmmmmm?”

“Arm the teachers”? Maybe, but let’s make sure that their training and qualifications for using firearms are far superior to the academics and screening to which most of them were subjected in order to run a classroom.

(Teachers reading this, please note: I am not dissing you as a vocation, as a group or as individuals. It is teacher training in my rhetorical crosshairs. Full disclosure: I was once one of you.)

Training? One of my daughters is a school marm and has a concealed carry. But! Guns are not allowed in school! She is not allowed to keep a gun in her car either on “school property”, thus she is still defenseless after she drives off property. I hear people saying teachers are not police. Cops carry guns primarily for self defense, not because it shows their authority. Her having a Masters degree in no way makes her incapable of defending herself. Politicos overall have no idea what “infringed” means in Amendment 2, not a grant by government, but is a right given by nature (or god if you are so inclined), that government shall not try to usurp.

ALL gun laws break the law. The idea that the Supreme Court’s “rulings” are final is also nonsense.

It’d be a delicious thing if one of those old dowagers (or old men) were themselves subjected to a roadside cavity search. Take off those Depends, sir. I need to see whether you’ve got any contraband in there….

Amendment 14, section 3.
“3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.”

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

And now a final question and a comment:

Does the Government use Force to enforce the dictates of the Federal Government and Federal Courts?

Can I logically reach any conclusion other than that EVERY member of the Federal Government has KNOWINGLY RESIGNED their post, while attempting to RETAIN the POWERS of their post?

El Gordo, you have nailed it. Lincoln nationalized this country and the current crop manning the District of Criminals are merely cashing in on the infringements, encroachments, armed robbery and tyranny handed down to them by their predecessors. They preside over the hostile occupying force known as regulators, inspectors and law enforcement. We the sheeple are seen as belligerents who must bow down and pay homage as well as tribute to our conquering masters. The law of war spells it out: If a sovereign occupies a territory with its military, that territory is subject to the will of the sovereign. IOW, if I have men with guns on your land I get to tell you what to do and I can take what I want. So we have to ask two key questions: Which of the several states and or territories DO NOT have a United States military base on them? And when, if ever, was “Reconstruction” (i.e. U.S. military occupation of the states) ever declared over after the War of Federal Aggression? Based on my research over the years, the answers are *none* and *never.* That might explain why this country is starting to look more like (worse than?) 1930s Germany every day.

I’m sure your daughter is probably a great teacher. However, the problem here is not that there aren’t great teachers in public school, the problem is that public school makes all teaching worthless. I’ll be frank as a product of public K-12 I can attest that I would not want to be a child with public school teacher’s carrying guns. Like all positions of government power usually the most abusive are attracted to these positions, hence why little people like to bully even littler people and often choose being a public school teacher. Edison lost his hearing in one ear from one of these great masters and I can say that I and many others have also reaped physical and mental abuse. We don’t need soldiers, or police, or armed teachers. What we do need is for people who want kids to raise their own. It’s really not too hard to see that the whole paradigm of public school is about authority. So to argue whether your daughter should have the authority like police officer’s misses the point. Your daughter should not have any authority that their parent’s don’t pay directly for and thus have a say in. In essence your daughter should be teaching in a private school or online classes. I opt for the latter actually. And the parents should be the final deciders of what they want or don’t want in that place of training. Public schooling is part and parcel with government authority and I sincerely believe both should be dismantled right now. Of course that assumes that people want to raise children and not just F and let the state care for them. Its a tall order since most have their brains stunted by the very system your daughter works in.

Sorry for the harsh words because I know you are definitely an ally and not an enemy.

“Your daughter should not have any authority that their parent’s don’t pay directly for and thus have a say in”

That was magnificently said!

And, exactly correct.

Government schools are fundamentally edifices of authority imposition and socialization to the collective. They are purposefully intended to prevent the development of a human being’s conceptual faculty: The child’s ability to reason.

They also exist to undermine the family – the legitimate authority of the parents. Replacing that with the illegitimate authority of the state.

More subtly, this undermining of the family is accomplished by encouraging people who probably ought not to have kids to have them anyhow. After all, the government will take care of their education. If it were up to each couple to do the heavy lifting of rearing and educating their children, the prospect of having children would surely be taken far more seriously than it often is nowadays.

Of course, to state such things is to be “mean spirited” and “anti-kid.”

BTW for all that know me I’m a firm believer of individual firearm ownership. I cannot say the same of government or their workers.

I once had a anti-gun nut want to go target shooting with me and some other guys. Do you think I took him along? The one thing my grandpa taught me was not to ever let someone who was crazy, didn’t like me, or angry at me to use my gun. There are some nuts that I’m plain against arming for the same reason. Public school teachers on average have been some of the biggest nuts, idiots, and plain losers I’ve ever met. Arm them (public school teachers) against school children? Are you kidding me? No way!!! Again if you daughter is a believer in individual rights she has no place in a public school system of government indoctrination.

BTW I have a master’s of science so I’m not a school hater. Just a public K-12 school teacher hater.

It’s easy to look at so-and-so (a person you think is a little strange) and have that feeling well up: I don’t like the idea of him having a gun. And perhaps, your feeling is right.

But if it becomes acceptable to deprive any person of their rights before they’ve crossed the line and violated someone else’s rights – then we’ve accepted a very dangerous notion. One that can (and will) one day be turned against people who deserve it even less, including people like us. Because absent the actual violation of someone else’s rights, there is no objective, rational criteria for basing such a priori control/punishment of others. Just subjectives and generalities: “Someone” might use a gun (or car or knife or club) maliciously or irresponsibly. Therefore, no one (except, of course, our anointed masters in government) may possess or use the gun (or car or knife or club) and will be punished merely for that. Not for any actual harm caused to any actual person. But merely for having trespassed against “the law.”

Once again this was a fantastic article by the way and thank you for agreeing with many of my thoughts it means a lot to me that a guy of your moral fiber and intelligence shares many of the same world views.

I must say that when I talk about restraining teacher’s from having guns in public schools. Its for the very reason that I’m against the school system and not the teacher personally having the guns there. If a teacher was on private school with private property and the parents who paid the bill believed it wise that the teacher carry a gun to protect their kids then great (would be my personal choice if I had a kid). First I wouldn’t put a fictitious kid of mine in the hands of a private teacher I didn’t trust. I must say its gets kind of scary what our rights become on carrying weapons on other people’s private property however. Autozone being one of them. For it would be unethical and immoral for me to carry my guns uninvited on your private property and certainly not wise of me. Likewise, if schools were private and the customer’s (being parents) wanted the teacher as an employee to carry or not than that would be their choice. It would also be the teacher’s choice not to work for supposed stupid employers that restrict their right to personal safety. I know that I’ve worked for several employer’s that were anti-gun. And although I didn’t like their policies if they told me no guns on their property I felt compelled to obey because it was their property after all and I was an employee or contractor. Public schools however really concern me, because gun toting of teacher’s could easily be seen as another agression against school children in the since of overwhelming force and policing. And as agents of the state public school teachers would soon become self evaluators and police state protecting their own against the very same people they were meant to do one thing and supposedly teach not indoctrinate. Personally, I don’t work for anyone anymore. And any employee I do hire in the near future will be somebody I personally trust. They will be invited to carry a weapon on my property. If I lose that trust I’d be the first to ask them not to bring a gun on property I was renting or owned. Which brings me to AutoZone. I think Autozone was probably had a right to fire its employee for having a firearm on its private property. However, I think it was very foolish considering the outcome and how the worker helped the situation. I also think they did the worker a favor, and I also agree to boycott the company to make them reconsider their policy for all other customers who may want to carry on their private property. So basically I’m in total agreement on everything you said I just want to clarify why I treat public and government workers much different. Simply because government is a rogue institute that has no private owner to mitigate bad behavior including firearms use. Hence my whole objection to public school teachers carrying firearms. Ideally this point of differing opinion would be no mute if their were no public Nazi indoctrination centers of authority. There are usually two types of public school teacher’s. Those that want to make a difference and are hamstrung to go along to get along. And those that are abusive typical government tyrants, the latter being the ones in charge.

“She’s just a school teacher.” “He on the other hand, is a policeman.”

When I lived in Houston, I was a long time member of a gun club that owned two shooting ranges. One was a 100 yard rifle range on the edge of town. The other as a 25 yard pistol range tucked under a freeway overpass inside the city center.

The local cops would periodically use our pistol range to “qualify.”

Each time a cease fire was called and the targets collected, it was embarrassingly obvious who the better shooters were.

The civilians, not the ostensible “experts” and “professionals.”

Hollywood movies often include a cliched scene in which a plainclothes detective’s gun inadvertently becomes visible to bystanders in a public place.

Al, I empathize with your daughter’s circumstances. They are exactly the same as my wife’s. That said, qualification for a CC permit typically requires little or no training. I would submit to you just one area relevant to this discussion where training would be crucial: shooting background.

Keep in mind that a teacher has not only herself to defend, but potentially other innocents not kin to her: but her responsibility nonetheless. I suggest training for both the sake of the kids and the sake of those in charge of them.

One comment on this gun thing. This is a big example of people that need guns to protect themselves are more often than not killed with their own weapons or used on their own family members. I would guess from what I hear the guns hurt the owner more often than protect them. This is just one example of dozens of cases each year.

“This is a big example of people that need guns to protect themselves are more often than not killed with their own weapons or used on their own family members.”

As illiterate (and fact-free) as usual, Clover.

You literally just pull stuff out of your ass. Where are the facts that demonstrate “…people that need guns to protect themselves are more often than not killed with their own weapons or used on their own family members”?

No Clover, as usual you are full of bovine excrement and have no difficulty spewing it in an ignorant and thoughtless fashion. Guns are used between 1.5 to 2.5 million times a year to thwart violent crime in the United States and typically a shot is never fired. High profile cases like Aurora and Sandy hook are emotional focal points to be sure, but they are not statistically significant and they are easily preventable by good people with guns. Even in the Cloverian dream world of post Mao China, people do bad things without guns: http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/world/chinese-man-rams-car-into-students-injures-13/story-e6frfkui-1226543387710#ixzz2G4FVOAeu
In my case my (now ex-) wife’s handgun saved her from being raped. The lady I’m now married to prevented herself being forced off the road one night and from being robbed in a well lit gas station parking lot another night…with…wait for it Clover…her handgun. Clover, why is it that you want to see honest, decent people disarmed? So more murder, rape and mayhem can occur? That’s the Christmas spirit Clover. You do a far better job of exposing yourself for who you are than we ever could. Keep up the good work.

You are either someone deliberately pulling our chain or you are the dumbest person on the planet.

Guns are properly used defensively far and away more times than they are used against a family member. And the majority of the times the gun is not even fired. Its mere presence often diffuses a situation.

Google John Lott to get the facts, clover. Oh wait, my bad. Clovers don’t do facts. Or thinking.

Clover doesnt accept principle”the law,is the law”( gasp.you ran that redlight!) Naw says the judge” my hands are tied” Malarky,Clover will be lead bleating softly to the slaughterhouse.
During my stint in the” Governors school for the gifted” human nature became real apparent-let me tell you Folks,depend only on yourself.Intellgence is a rare gift-Kevin

How many times have I heard that stupid expression of hopeless resignation when, to comfortably acquiesce in all laws it would be necessary for a person to assume that there are no bad ones. Why does a homo sapiens acquiesce in laws that stifle his very nature? Bad law should not be merely avoided, thereby leaving the unwary and unlucky to be legally rendered by an insatiable faction made up of legal parasites; it should be openly defied by more citizens than
can possibly be arrested, jailed, impoverished or otherwise ruined by the unlawful Legal System that has supplanted the genuine Law of the Land.

Know the Difference
Lawful and legal are not synonyms. There is an ethical element in lawful that is painfully absent in legal.

Encroaching Tyranny
Unmistakable signs of legal tyranny have been increasingly visible for more than ninety years. Consider the Eighteenth Amendment, along with lawyer Harrison’s infamous Act1.

Principles Routinely Contravened
Beginning with Power that obviously contravenes Unalienable Rights, all laws that are repugnant to the July 4, 1776 Action of the Second Continental Congress should be systematically eliminated. The non-amendable July 4, 1776 Action of the Second Continental Congress clearly establishes the philosophical, i.e., lawful limits to government power.

In the light of the Declaration of Independence, Americans today have greater lawful cause for rebellion than did the Colonists in 1776.

That’s not saying much, because they didn’t have any proper excuse for their particular kind of rebellion. They did have proper motivation for a Great Trek sort of thing to get out from under, the way the later Boer voortrekkers and the Mormons did, but none at all for actions that included their own tyranny: stealing the property of others, massacring and exiling those others when they could not hide (which meant repressing their freedom of speech etc.), welching on agreed settlements in the peace treaty, etc.